[KingLT1]

Depends on mods. At 850ft, my Brothers C7Z was limited to E40 with 2.3 pulley, ported 1.7, cat delete x pipe, vararam, ported 95mm tb, JMS.

Then again I might be running our cars richer then some. I stay around .80-.82 on LT1's and .82-.84 on LT4 stuff.

It takes a lot of fuel system to run E60+ at these AFR's.

[CW3SF]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

Depends on mods. At 850ft, my Brothers C7Z was limited to E40 with 2.3 pulley, ported 1.7, cat delete x pipe, vararam, ported 95mm tb, JMS.

Then again I might be running our cars richer then some. I stay around .80-.82 on LT1's and .82-.84 on LT4 stuff.

It takes a lot of fuel system to run E60+ at these AFR's.

Yeah I’m talking stock pulleys. My car stays right on .82 @ WOT. E40 makes sense with the pulley and porting.

[Evansa22]

Originally Posted by CW3SF

Just curious why you are only running e25? Do you have a JMS booster? If you only have bolt ons right now (headers, catback, throttle body and CAI) you could run up to e60 at sea level with only a JMS booster on your low side. If you then port the blower, you should be able to run somewhere around e50ish. Your tuner will be able to check your headroom on pump and injector at that point and let you know what blend is safe. Are you opposed to the booster?

Sorry 8% pulley. I do have the jms installed, low side is fine. At about 30% e high side starts to drop and pulse width jumps. That's shooting for .80-.82 lambda, 13.5 psi of boost max. Lambda stays fine its just ipw jumps to compensate

[Joshinator99]

Originally Posted by Evansa22

Sorry 8% pulley. I do have the jms installed, low side is fine. At about 30% e high side starts to drop and pulse width jumps. That's shooting for .80-.82 lambda, 13.5 psi of boost max. Lambda stays fine its just ipw jumps to compensate

No reason to shoot for .80 on an LT4 IMO…

[CW3SF]

Originally Posted by Evansa22

Sorry 8% pulley. I do have the jms installed, low side is fine. At about 30% e high side starts to drop and pulse width jumps. That's shooting for .80-.82 lambda, 13.5 psi of boost max. Lambda stays fine its just ipw jumps to compensate

Ah ok, I forgot you have the pulley. There’s a measurable trade off with the pulleys and the amount of E you can run. The higher blend plus the cooling (slower spin rate) is why I’m staying with stock pulleys.

[EDFHOBBIES]

I don't think there is a way to put an exact number on it since most power adders are not equal in efficiency and flow.

if ya do go port.. I filed up w e92 last week at the pump then a few days later it was 84 its nice not having to worry about a ratio.

[KingLT1]

There isn't and I am sure it will vary some from build to build...I was just basing the 30whp on what I have seen multiple forced induction cars make with various levels of E. I would say E40 provides 75% of the gains compared to E85, E60 is 90%...etc. E60 is the sweet spot really...Obviously being able to pull up to a pump and just fill up with whatever E is nice, but it's not a big deal if you need to mix it down some. I ran full pump E for a long time and I don't really find it much of a inconvenience to have to mix it down now...especially when my options are mix it down some or shell out a few thousand for more fuel system upgrades to run full E which I might make another 10-15whp. I might still do it just for the smell lol. E40 has a bit more gas smell to it. Once you get to E60+ it smells a lot better out the exhaust.

[Evansa22]

Right on, maybe I'll have to try another tuner. However, I told him I wanted to be conservative tho, longevity in mind. He says he shoots for .80. I've read Jannetty hits .82. I'm assuming running it leaner than I am now, I can stretch the fuel system further.

As far as blending ethanol, not very hard or time consuming. I just use a percentage based off how much 91 I'm putting in. That or my brewcityboost.com calculator, thing is spot on.

[Evansa22]

Originally Posted by Joshinator99

No reason to shoot for .80 on an LT4 IMO…

These engines are able to run leaner based on the direct injection? Ignorant on this subject, Interested to hear the reasoning

[CW3SF]

Originally Posted by Evansa22

These engines are able to run leaner based on the direct injection? Ignorant on this subject, Interested to hear the reasoning

My local tuner also uses .82 on LT4

[Joshinator99]

Originally Posted by Evansa22

These engines are able to run leaner based on the direct injection? Ignorant on this subject, Interested to hear the reasoning

DI runs leaner than standard port injection engines for sure.

Most tuners will rightfully be conservative on the factory LT1 pistons since they’re cast, so .82 is great. On the LT4 or built LT1, the pistons are forged, so really no need to be ultra conservative. I’m at .84 and runs like a champ.

[Evansa22]

Originally Posted by Joshinator99

DI runs leaner than standard port injection engines for sure.

Most tuners will rightfully be conservative on the factory LT1 pistons since they’re cast, so .82 is great. On the LT4 or built LT1, the pistons are forged, so really no need to be ultra conservative. I’m at .84 and runs like a champ.

Right on, thanks for the info. I'll mention to my tuner and see what he says. Appreciate it!

[Evansa22]

Dynomite dyno, all 3 pulls were within 4 hp

[CW3SF]

Originally Posted by Evansa22

Dynomite dyno, all 3 pulls were within 4 hp

I’ve heard those dynos read really low. What mods on the car for those pulls?